ArticleCureus2023
Diagnostic and Prognostic Value of Laboratory Risk Indicator for Necrotizing Fasciitis Score.
Article in Cureus, 2023. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 7 papers, 1 of them a synthesis that pooled it.
What it found
Each row is one number read from the abstract, on the scale the paper reported it, with its interval. Left of the dashed line favours the treatment, right favours the comparator. Under each row is the sentence it came from. New to these charts? A ten-minute tutorial.
The abstract states no effect estimate the extractor could read, or names no intervention and outcome on the map, so this paper lights no cell and moves no belief. It is still indexed, cited and linked below.
The trial behind it
Trials whose registry record cites this paper, or whose number appears in the abstract. A trial that started after this paper was published is citing it as background, not reporting it.
Neither the registry nor the abstract names a trial number. If this is a trial report, that itself is worth knowing.
Who cites it
7 citing papers in PubMed, 1 synthesis or guideline pooled it.
- Life-threatening complications in ophthalmic surgery: a systematic review.Eye (London, England) · 2025Pooled it
- Necrotizing Fasciitis in Northern Italy: Clinical Characteristics, Risk Factors, and Prognostic Value of the LRINEC Score-A Single-Center Retrospective Case Series.Infectious disease reports · 2026Article
- Necrotizing Fasciitis in Switzerland: Risk Factors and Clinical Outcomes Based on a 12-Year Retrospective Study.Journal of clinical medicine · 2026Article
- Article
- Epidemiology and prognostic factors of necrotizing fasciitis in resource-limited regions based on 119 cases.Scientific reports · 2025Article
- Article
- Prognostic Factors in Necrotizing Fasciitis: Insights from a Two-Decade, Two-Center Study Involving 209 Cases.Infectious disease reports · 2024Article
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
4 authors.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
backgroundNecrotizing fasciitis (NF) is a lethal soft tissue infection involving skin and subcutaneous tissue with significant morbidity and mortality.
aimTo validate the diagnostic and prognostic role of the Laboratory Risk Indicator for Necrotizing Fasciitis (LRINEC) scoring system for NF in patients who present with soft tissue infections.
methodsThe study was conducted on 100 patients who presented with soft tissue infections. Based on the histopathological findings, they were divided into NF and non-necrotizing soft tissue infection groups. Patients were clinically assessed. The lab parameters were assessed and the LRINEC score was calculated. Patients were stratified based on score and grouped into low, intermediate, and high risk. For patients who went into sepsis, the death rate and length of hospital stay, including ICU, were noted based on the scoring system.
resultsIn our study, the diagnostic role of LRINEC score ≥ 6 had a sensitivity of 85.7% and specificity of 62.7%, and score ≥ 8 had a sensitivity of 67.3% and specificity of 82.3% with a positive predictive value (PPV) of 78.5 and negative predictive value (NPV) of 72.4, of which 8 is a better cut-off as a diagnostic criterion. The area under the curve was found to be 0.835. To predict the prognostic role, a cut-off value was calculated from the receiver operating characteristic curves of both mortality and sepsis patients in relation to the LRINEC score of 9. With the LRINEC score cut-off as 9, with mortality and sepsis as variables, the sensitivity was 50% and 53.3%, specificity was 94.2% and 91.4%, PPV was 78.9% and 72.7%, and NPV was 81.4% and 82%, respectively.
conclusionThe LRINEC score is quick, safe, reproducible, noninvasive, cost-effective, and easily calculated, and has high sensitivity and specificity to predict early diagnosis, and it could be used for risk stratification and prognosis of necrotizing soft tissue infections.
Indexed as
Identifiers
What OpenQuestion holds
Registered trials
Read under generation 80e0d062 · epoch 390. Bibliography from PubMed, PubMed Central and OpenAlex; grants from NIH RePORTER; trial links from ClinicalTrials.gov; estimates, votes and beliefs from the OpenQuestion graph.